FOI 44-24: Request regarding the report into allegations made in an anonymous series of allegations to the previous Speaker regarding Internal Audit

Information Standards Freedom of Information Response

4 December 2024

Our ref: FoI 44-24

I am writing to confirm that the Northern Ireland Assembly Commission (Assembly Commission) has processed your request dated 17 October 2024 under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. In your request, you asked forthe following information:

'1. A copy of the report generated by [John Sturrock KC] following his investigation into allegations made in an anonymous series of allegations to the previous Speaker regarding Internal Audit;

2. A copy of the most recent Internal Audit report on the corporate governance arrangements in the Assembly.'

Report into anonymous allegations

The Assembly Commission holds information relevant to your request. The Assembly Commission considers this information to be exempt from disclosure under section 36 of the FOIA (prejudice to the effective conduct of public affairs).

Section 36 may be applied to information if, in the reasonable opinion of a qualified person (in the case of the Assembly, the Speaker of the Assembly) disclosure would have one or more of the prejudicial effects specified in the three limbs of section 36.

The Assembly Commission has considered the opinion of the Speaker, who has concluded that all three limbs of section 36 are engaged by this request, and the Assembly Commission has therefore applied the public interest test in respect of each limb of section 36. This requires the Assembly Commission to decide whether the public interest in maintaining each exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure. The Assembly Commission has given weight to the opinion of the Speaker commensurate with his role as the elected chair of the Assembly's proceedings and chairperson of the Assembly Commission.1

Section 36(2)(b)(i): free and frank provision of advice

1. The report in question (the Sturrock Report) sets out the outcome of a review of certain anonymous allegations carried out by John Sturrock KC. It was prepared in confidence for the previous Speaker and all of those who participated in the review were given assurances of confidentiality.

2. In forming his reasonable opinion for the purposes of section 36(2)(b)(i), the Speaker concluded that disclosure of the Sturrock Report would-

1. • Impair the ability of the Assembly Commission to seek confidential independent expert advice, thereby decreasing the quality of decision making by the Assembly Commission.
   • Make it less likely that external independent advisers would be willing to work with the Assembly Commission, if the confidentiality of their work and opinions on sensitive issues could not be assured.

3. Section 36 is a qualified exemption and the Assembly Commission must also consider the balance of the public interest. In considering the public interest test, the Assembly Commission considered the concerns of the Speaker to be well-founded, and agreed that the disclosure of the report would inhibit the free and frank provision of advice to the Assembly Commission. It considered that the factors outlined at paragraph 2 above weigh heavily in favour of maintaining the exemption.

4. In considering the public interest test, the Assembly Commission also considered the following matters relevant to disclosing the information-

• • Public sector transparency promotes and supports accountability within an efficient and effective democracy.
  • Disclosure of the report would allow for public scrutiny and meaningful public debate of the issues arising.

5. Having considered the public interest in disclosure and the public interest in maintaining the exemption under section 36(2)(b)(i), the Assembly Commission is satisfied that the public interest in disclosing the information is outweighed by the public interest in maintaining the exemption.

Section 36(2)(b)(ii): free and frank exchange of views for the purposes of deliberation

6. In forming his reasonable opinion for the purposes of section 36(2)(b)(ii), the Speaker concluded that disclosure of the report would-

• • • Inhibit the ability of the Assembly Commission and its senior employees to openly discuss and explore options, alternative approaches and resolutions in relation to confidential matters.
    • Erode the confidence of employees in confidential processes, with the result that they would be unwilling to participate in future reviews of operational performance with the necessary freedom and candour.
    • Inhibit the exchange of views thereby decreasing the quality of decision making by the Assembly Commission which could undermine the integrity of processes.

7. Section 36 is a qualified exemption and the Assembly Commission must also consider the balance of the public interest. In considering the public interest test, the Assembly Commission considered the concerns of the Speaker to be well-founded, and agreed that the disclosure of a confidential review would inhibit the free and frank exchange of views among its employees, diminishing the effectiveness of advice to the Assembly Commission and to senior employees on complex parliamentary and corporate matters. It considered that the factors outlined at paragraph 6 weigh heavily in favour of maintaining the exemption.

8. In considering the public interest test, the Assembly Commission also considered the following matters relevant to disclosing the information-

• • • Public sector transparency promotes and supports accountability within an efficient and effective democracy.
    • Disclosure of the report would allow for public scrutiny and meaningful public debate of the issues arising.

9. Having considered the public interest in disclosure and the public interest in maintaining the exemption under section 36(2)(b)(ii), the Assembly Commission is satisfied that the public interest in disclosing the information is outweighed by the public interest in maintaining the exemption.

Section 36(2)(c): free and frank exchange of views for the purposes of deliberation

10. In forming his reasonable opinion for the purposes of section 36(2)(c), the Speaker concluded that disclosure of the report would otherwise prejudice the effective conduct of public affairs. The Speaker formed the view that-

1. • • Disclosure would impair the ability of the Assembly Commission to offer an effective public service, and lead to trial by media.
     • Disclosure would prejudice the effective management of human resources in the Assembly Commission due to the disruptive effect of dealing with the disclosure.
     • Disclosure could lead to a public perception of instability in the Assembly Commission which would impact on the public trust in the Assembly.

11. Section 36 is a qualified exemption and the Assembly Commission must also consider the balance of the public interest. In considering the public interest test, the Assembly Commission considered the concerns of the Speaker to be well-founded, and agreed that the disclosure of a confidential review would impair the ability of the Assembly Commission to offer an effective public service, prejudice the effective management of human resources in the Assembly Commission and generate a public perception of instability in the Assembly Commission. It considered that these factors weigh heavily in favour of maintaining the exemption.

12. In considering the public interest test, the Assembly Commission also considered the following matters relevant to disclosing the information-

• • • Public sector transparency promotes and supports accountability.
    • Disclosure of the report would allow for public scrutiny of the issues set out therein.

13. Having considered the public interest in disclosure and the public interest in maintaining the exemption under section 36(2)(c), the Assembly Commission is satisfied that the public interest in disclosing the information is outweighed by the public interest in maintaining the exemption.

Internal Audit report on the Corporate Governance Arrangements

14. The Assembly Commission holds information relevant to your request. The Assembly Commission considers this information to be exempt from disclosure under section 41 of the FOIA (Provided in Confidence).

15. The internal audit report is held in its draft form and has been provided in confidence by the third-party provider of internal audit services for the purpose of obtaining management responses from Assembly Commission officials.

16. The Assembly Commission considers that the draft report is exempt from disclosure under section 41. Section 41 of the FOIA provides that information provided in confidence is exempt from disclosure:

(1) Information is exempt information if-

(a) it was obtained by the public authority from any other person (including another public authority), and

(b) the disclosure of the information to the public (otherwise than under this Act) by the public authority holding it would constitute a breach of confidence actionable by that or any other person.

17. A final report has not been agreed and therefore is not held under section 1 of the FOIA.

Advice and Assistance

18. In dealing with request one, the Assembly Commission has noted that part of the Sturrock Report may contain your personal data. You may wish to make a subject access request for this data under the UK General Data Protection Regulation and the Data Protection Act 2018. If you wish to make such a request, you may contact me. Under the data protection legislation, I must validate your identity before I can process your request, therefore I would ask that you also forward a photograph or screenshot of any of the following documents:

• • • Driving licence
    • Passport
    • Electoral Identification Card

Further information

You have the right to request an internal review of this decision by the Assembly Commission. If you wish to request such a review, please write to me at the above address. If, after that review, you are dissatisfied with the way in which the Assembly Commission has handled your request for information, you may complain to the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) at Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.

Your request for information and our response may be published in the disclosure log maintained by the Assembly Commission under a publication scheme agreed with the ICO. The request and our response will be anonymised. 

Yours sincerely

Data Protection and Governance Officer

Information Standards

[1] Per Department for Works and Pensions v Information Commissioner & Zola [2016] EWCA Civ 758